Memorandum submitted by the Wales Council
for Voluntary Action
I am writing with reference to the Constitutional
Affairs Committee review of Devolution: a Decade on.
Wales Council for Voluntary Action represents,
campaigns for, supports and develops third sector organisations,
community action, and volunteering in Wales. It represents the
sector at a European, UK, and national level, and together with
a range of national specialist agencies, county third councils,
and volunteer centres, and other development agencies, it provides
a support structure for the third sector in Wales. It has over
2,000 members, and is in touch with many more organisations through
a wide range of national and local networks.
WCVA has consulted widely and regularly with
the sector throughout the process of devolution—from the
original proposal to establish the National Assembly for Wales,
through the Richard Commission, and up to the imminent enhancement
of the Assembly's powers and other changes introduced by the new
Government of Wales Act.
Based on this wide-ranging engagement with the
sector on the Assembly and issues arising from devolution, I would
like to put forward the following comments about issues for the
third sector with regard to your current review.
1. Eight years on from the advent of devolution
a number of fault lines have become evident in the relationship
between Wales and Whitehall. Many of these difficulties were highlighted
in the consultations WCVA undertook in preparation for the submission
of evidence to the Richard Commission. Whilst the new devolution
settlement enshrined in the Government of Wales Act 2006 will
potentially diminish some of the problems, others will remain.
2. The devolution settlement made it difficult
for the Assembly Government to develop integrated policies in
some areas. For example, whilst the Assembly Government is responsible
for planning and promoting education and training in Wales, it
does not have responsibility for Sector Skills Councils.
3. This is exacerbated where Westminster
and the Assembly Government differ on their policy positions and
can result in disjointed and even contradictory policies as was
the case of the draft Mental Health Bill and the Welsh Assembly
Government's Adult Mental Health Strategy.
4. The third sector in Wales has strong
relationships with the Welsh Assembly Government through the Voluntary
Sector Scheme. In England, the third sector and the Government
have signed a Compact setting out similar relationships and agreed
ways of working—although the Scheme and the Compact have
developed differently.
5. The third sector in Wales has no agreed
relationships for working with any Whitehall departments on non-devolved
issues. This has proved a considerable problem since devolution
and has put the third sector in a considerably weaker position
in influencing policy development, service delivery and support
for civil society in Wales on non-devolved issues.
6. The sector in Wales has often not been
invited to participate in influencing policy development by Whitehall
departments at an early and formative stage. For example, as part
of the Lottery Review, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport
recently invited National Council for Third Organisations (WCVA's
sister body in England) and three third sector umbrella groups
for England to preliminary discussions about lottery funding policies.
When approached by WCVA, the DCMS made it clear that it did not
intend to hold parallel discussions with third sector representatives
from the other three countries despite the policy having an equally
significant impact on the sector in those countries.
7. In other consultations, UK departments
have consulted via the Welsh Assembly Government. Whist organisations
reported that they feel these consultations have mostly been inclusive
and that their opinions have been reflected in the reports, the
lack of influence that the Assembly Government has over Whitehall
decision-making means that their voices have not been heard.
8. In some cases it is apparent that officials
Whitehall departments simply do not know whether their policies
apply to devolved areas or not, causing confusion and wasted time
for third sector organisations. Organisations in Wales have spent
time and resources responding to consultations by Whitehall departments
only to discover later in the process that the policy will not
affect Wales. For example, some organisations in Wales participated
in a consultation exercise around the 2003 Treasury crosscutting
review only to find that the remit of the review was to include
England only.
9. There is also lack of clarity about some
funding streams. It is relatively clear what the Assembly Government
funds, but difficult to determine what Whitehall departments are
funding in Wales and why. There is no clarity at time of announcement,
or even several months down the line, as discussed later.
10. There are examples where Whitehall departments
have not involved their counterparts in the Assembly Government
in policy development on issues that will have a major impact
in Wales. For example, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport
failed to consult with the relevant Assembly Government division
about the Licensing Bill. Whilst licensing is a non-devolved issue,
provisions in the Bill had significant implications on several
key policy areas that are the responsibility of the Assembly Government—including
the arts, community sustainability and social inclusion.
11. There is frequently a lack of clarity
about the relevance of Whitehall-led consultations and funding
streams to Wales. If a consultation is of consequence there is
often no mechanism in place for seeking the views of the third
sector in Wales. It is also not clear why UK departments undertake
England only reviews which cover nondevolved issues, for example
the 2003 Treasury review covering irrecoverable VAT for registered
charities.
12. The issues described above could be
addressed through each Whitehall department with non-devolved
functions establishing a statutory committee for Wales. The committee
would provide an interface for considering the interaction of
non-devolved policies with devolved policy. It could review and
advise on consultation arrangements and ensure that the department
observes the provisions of the Third Sector Scheme when operating
in Wales. Third sector representation on such a committee would
be important to ensure the sector's perspective is heard.
13. Another area of concern in Wales is
the operation of the Public Appointments system. Welsh candidates
for UK appointments appear to be disadvantaged by a lack of equality
of esteem for their national (ie all-Wales) experience. As a result,
applicants from Wales for an England and Wales public body, for
example, be appointed and `pigeon-holed' as a Wales member, but
would be unlikely to be appointed as a chair or vice chair. It
implies that national (Wales) experience is deemed to be of less
value that national (England) experience.
14. There are therefore a number of recommendations
that the committee is invited to consider:
— each non-devolved department should
establish a statutory committee for Wales to keep the interface
with devolved policies and arrangements under review;
— the statutory committee should include
members with knowledge of the third sector in Wales;
— the statutory committee should ensure
there is full consultation within Wales of all non-devolved policies
affecting Wales;
— non-devolved departments should use
the principles set out in the National Assembly Voluntary Sector
Scheme to guide their relationships with the third sector in Wales;
— there must be absolute clarity on
how (or whether) policies of non-devolved departments impact on
Wales at the earliest stage of their development; and
— public appointments procedures should
be reviewed to ensure that the experience of candidates on an
all-Wales basis is considered to be of equal value to experience
on an all-England basis.
I hope these comments are helpful, and I look
forward to the outcome of the committee's deliberations.
Graham Benfield OBE
Chief Executive
April 2007
| 
